A friend of mine were encouraging someone we know to be baptized. He was sprinkled as a baby in his church as a baby, and we were sharing with him about baptism from the scriptures. He's trying to get out of some sin in his life, but he didnt' seem to acknowledge yet that he needed to be baptized. I gave him a list of Bible verses to study.

The other person who was talking to him was baptized in an evangelical church. She too was sprinkled as a baby in a traditional church, but later she was baptized when she was about 14. She shared about having her 'first love' as a Christian, getting up in the wee hours of the morning in her crowded house and putting some newpaper onteh tiny kitchen floor to have a place to kneel down and pray. She loved to read the Bible. She said that it was not until after she was baptized that she began to be able to stop lying, and doing other sins. This woman is not from an RM background.

I remember talking to another friend of mine who went to a Charismatic church. A friend of mine nad I had talked to him about verses in the Bible in relation to baptism. He went for months after praying a salvation prayer before he was baptized. Actually, he had been sprinkled as a roman catholic as a baby as well. During the time before he was baptized, the Lord really worked in his life, sometimes answering specific prayers like healing a friends broken arm when he prayed for it (I heard) and he encouraged many uneblievers to repent. After he was baptized, I wentover to his appartment with him and we talked for a while. He told me that he had a real sense of peace after he was baptized. He felt different.

A couple of years ago, I had diner with a Bible college professor/preacher who was gifted in teaching and prophetic ministry. I could tell from his preaching that he had studied the scriptures, and probably church history, on the issue of baptism as well as many other things. He didn't have a typical evangelical view on baptism. He might have been somewhere between an RM and Evangelical view on baptism. But he was ministering in Charismatic circles in Indonesia.

We were talking about soome of the difficulties for ministry in Indonesia. Legal baptism certificates (a legal form of ID that only Christians need for legal purposes here) are only given out by authorized denominations. The denominations (including the COC denomination here) have policies and procedures regarding who can baptize and get a certificate from them. The denominational organization he was working with did not allow him, as a foreign missionary, to baptize (maybe because it could potentially cause problems with the government.) Normally this was not a problem, but he told me a story where the beauracracy caused a problem.

There was a man who had some sort of demonic trouble who had heard the Gospel and wanted to become a Christian. This missionary wanted to baptize the man, but the church officials didn't want to give out a baptism certificate, and wanted the man to wait until the weekend ot be baptized in a big baptismal service. If I remember right, the man was having some sort of problems with demons, maybe poltergeist type problems in his house. I believe he did eventually get baptized.

This was the second time I'd heard from men in evagelical circles of a relationship between baptism and demonic activity stopping in a person's life. A friend of mine who studied at an evangelical seminary had read learned that studying missiology.

From what I gather about the Ante-Nicene church period, if someone believed in the Gospel of Jesus Christ and was baptized in the name of the Father, Son, and Holy Ghost, his baptism would be accepted by the church. The general view, or the view that took precedence was to allow baptisms even if a person was baptized in a rival congregation outside of the main church (considered to be a heretical congregation.)

Some in the Restoration Movement seem to believe that one not only has to be baptized, but that he must believe that he is saved at the moment of baptism to be saved. I would like to know if this tends to be more of a (sof) CoC position than a CC position. Are independant conservative congregations in the US which go by the name Christian Church more likely to accept baptisms done outside of the RM than their counterparts in congregations known as Church of Christ? Feel free to answer from your own experiences if you don't have any statistics.

-- Anonymous, October 12, 2000

Answers

Link,

The question you ask is difficult to answer due to the Restoration (and Biblical) Principle of each congregation existing as a seperate entity, with no central ruling body or person designating policy for the whole.

Some CoC/CC churches may be more dogmatic toward the circumstances surrounding one's Baptism than others are - generalities are something to be avoided on this topic.

However, My experiences in the Restoration Christian Church is far from what you describe. Yes we teach that Salvation occurs at Baptism (immersion), as per Acts 2:38 and many other passages. We advise those (who have been sprinkled, poured, etc but not immersed) who come to us to be immersed. If they have been previously immersed in another type of church, their conscious must then be their guide. If they are satisfied that their immersion was for the forgiveness of their sins, there is no need to immerse them again. But if their conscious is not clear about it, they should be immersed. More than 1 passage of scripture tells us that Baptism (immersion) cleanses our conscious as well as our sins - if one doesn't feel that cleansing, then something must be done about it.

Personally, I fall into that category. I was Immersed in a Baptist church at age 8, but I am comfortable in the knowledge that I desired immersion then because my Bible said it had to be done to wash away my sin. Therefore I have never felt the need to be immersed again once I joined the Christian Church. Several here on this Forum know this background and have never expressed any concern about my salvation. And I think that is typical of most Preachers and leaders in Restoration Churches. But as in all things, there will always be those in disagreement.

As for Baptism stopping demonic activity, I have my doubts. As one begins to actively live for Christ, one would start to shun those worldly activities that demonic influences would want you to partake in, so maybe things in their lives would definitely start to improve. But we also can be sure that before being saved (immersed) we already belonged to Satan, but after Baptism he has lost us to Christ and will intensify his efforts to win you back over to the "Dark Side". Don't forget the saying, "the price of Freedom is eternal vigilence".

That should probably make the waters as clear as mud for you,

-- Anonymous, October 13, 2000

The beautiful thing about the Lord's church is that you can't join it, in fact in the book of acts it makes reference to the fact that folks didnt dare. When you obey the gospel you are added to the Lord's church. No matter where you roam you are a member of his church and would be accepted as such in each congregation of the Lord's church once you were open and honest about your intentions. Most congregations extend the "Right hand" of Chrstian fellowship at the same time the "Hymn of decision" is sung, for those newly arriving in the area. Keep studying, Bro. Jack

-- Anonymous, October 14, 2000

Since Christians go by the NT, however flawed it may be, let us look at that...it seems to fit this forum quite well...

Hebrews 5: 11
We have much to say about this, but it is hard to explain because you are slow to learn.
Slow to learn: The Greek here is nothroi, which means "stupid" for you who don't know Greek...
12 In fact, though by this time you ought to be teachers, you need someone to teach you the elementary truths of G-d's word all over again. You need milk, not solid food!
The Greek for "elementary Truths of G-d" is: stoicheia tas archas ton logion tou theou". Now, I know some of you wishful-thinkers want this to mean "Christian theology", but we are going to keep it in the context of the book of Hebrews. What it means is "The Torah of G-d". Wait until chapter six, you'll see....
13 Anyone who lives on milk, being still an infant, is not acquainted with the teaching about righteousness. 14 But solid food is for the mature, who by constant use have trained themselves to distinguish good from evil. This mirrors what Paul said in 1Cor. 3:1-3, criticizing the Corinthians for being "dull of hearing".
Heb. 6: 1 Therefore let us leave the elementary teachings about Christ and go on to maturity, not laying again the foundation of repentance from acts that lead to death, and of faith in God,
What an interesting verse...the "elementary teachings about Christ"...literally, the "logon" or "word". What?!? Leave the "elementary teachings of Christ"??? To do what? Let us press on...
2 instruction about baptisms, the laying on of hands, the resurrection of the dead, and eternal judgment.
Goodness me! Did I just hear, "instruction about baptisms"?? Again, the Greek here is "didachas"...which is "teaching". Now, let's put all this in context: the writer of "Hebrews" (well, that title was added later, it was obviously written to Gentiles, since it speaks of the Jews in third-person), whether it was Paul or not (we have no proof either way) talks about them being "dull of hearing" and needing to learn again the "elementary principles of G-d". Then, the writer says to "go on to maturity" (6:1...teleioteita) and to quit arguing about things like "baptisms, the laying on of hands, the resurrection of the dead, and eternal judgment"....which compromises about 89% of the debates in this forum...

3 And God permitting, we will do so. 4 It is impossible for those who have once been enlightened, who have tasted the heavenly gift, who have shared in the Holy Spirit, 5 who have tasted the goodness of the word of God and the powers of the coming age, 6 if they fall away, to be brought back to repentance, because [2] to their loss they are crucifying the Son of God all over again and subjecting him to public disgrace. 7 Land that drinks in the rain often falling on it and that produces a crop useful to those for whom it is farmed receives the blessing of God. 8 But land that produces thorns and thistles is worthless and is in danger of being cursed. In the end it will be burned. 9 Even though we speak like this, dear friends, we are confident of better things in your case--things that accompany salvation.
things that accompany salvation...
10 God is not unjust; he will not forget your work and the love you have shown him as you have helped his people and continue to help them.
"his people"...the Jews.
11 We want each of you to show this same diligence to the very end, in order to make your hope sure. 12 We do not want you to become lazy, but to imitate those who through faith and patience inherit what has been promised.
...now, who are those who "inherit the promises"??
13 When God made his promise to Abraham, since there was no one greater for him to swear by, he swore by himself, 14 saying, "I will surely bless you and give you many descendants." 15 And so after waiting patiently, Abraham received what was promised.
So, Abraham received the promise...which was the covenant of salvation to all of Israel. This is the "promise" that Paul talks of so much, of being "grafted in" and so forth. This is the covenant of salvation to Israel...you see, the Jews never bothered to "believe" in Jesus, since they had no reason to...they had salvation already. Read Romans 11, Paul goes into much depth about this.

...a final point. The CC and the CoC split up, if memory serves me correctly, over whether or not to have a piano or organ in a church service. Now, if the writer of Hebrews said that one should leave the arguing of "baptisms, the laying on of hands, the resurrection of the dead, and eternal judgment", i.e., most of what is argued about in this forum, and go on to more "mature" things, certainly the argument over pianos and organs and other musical instruments is even less important. And one wonders why the CoC's message doesn't reach out very well...perhaps it because they are arguing over minor issues, and ignoring the Torah, the "elementary principles of G-d".

-- Anonymous, October 17, 2000

From another RM/CC/CoC/ forum:

Subj: [1stCen-Christianity] Our hermeneutics in the CofC Date: 10/16/00 11:23:33 PM Eastern Daylight Time From: jpdubo@juno.com Reply-to: 1stCen-Christianity@egroups.com To: 1stCen-Christianity@egroups.com

How did we get into such a complex "system" of biblical interpretation which causes a new schism every time a new "issue" arises?

Numerous scholars of our history agree that it was probably Alexander Campbell himself who got is started in the wrong direction in our hermeneutics.

Campbell approached the Bible with logic and reason, influenced largely by John Locke, author of 'On The Reasonableness of Christianity.'

Campbell reflects much Lockean thought in his 'Principles of Interpretation' in 'Christianity REstored.' He relies heavily upon the "inductive method" of interpretation, which means one must take all the biblical facts and pool them together, much as one would obtain knowledge about Oak trees by the same method. By observing a number of different Oak trees and pooling this information together one may draw accurate conclusions about the nature of the trees.

Campbell believed that Truth begins with a study of the facts, but reason is required to determine what the facts mean. See Dr. Tom Olbricht, "The Bible as Revelation," Restoration Quarterly, Vol. I, No. 4, p. 211.

See also his 'Hearing God's Voice,' pp. 123ff, and Dr. Leroy Garrett, 'The Stone-Campbell Movement.'

J. Paul

-- Anonymous, October 18, 2000

This also relates to the same subject: hermeneutics.

Subj: [1stCen-Christianity] CENI Hermeneutic Date: 10/16/00 11:22:14 PM Eastern Daylight Time From: jpdubo@juno.com Reply-to: 1stCen-Christianity@egroups.com To: 1stCen-Christianity@egroups.com

Command, Example, and Necessary Inference? There is both a command and an example for foot-washing

["If then, the Lord and Teacher, washed your feet, you also ought to wash one another's feet. For I gave you an example that you also should do as I did to you" -- that's what it says, Jno. 13: 4, 14, 15].

There is also the command and exammple for Christians greeting one another with a "holy kiss" [Rom. 16:16; I Pet. 5: 14].

At what point does a command and an example become merely "optional"?

See also I Cor. 11: 5, where a "headcovering" is "authorized". Upon what authority do we casually dismiss this inspired statement?

See also Rom. 16: 1 for the "authority" for deaconnesses. Phoebe was called a diakonon of the church at Cenchrea. Why are these commands and/or examples ignored among Churches of Christ today? Don't misunderstand me. I'm not advocating any of the above. I'm merely pointing out some of the fallacies in the CENI hemeneutic. jpdubo@juno.com J. Paul

jpdubo@juno.com J. Paul Du Bois, 3901 Montecito Dr., #209, Denton,Texas 76205 "We can't get ahead by trying to get even."

-- Anonymous, October 18, 2000

Alan. Just a few thoughts to share relative to several comments posted here. I am not good enough to keep up with all of them or the logic with which you link them together. I can understand why Paul in Hebrews would want them to stop going round and round on "Baptisms" as there was only "One Baptsm" as Paul had pointed out in Ephesians four. Another misunderstanding about the one baptism I see evidenced is that it is not just a dunking in water. Baptism (immersion) is for the purpose set forth in Holy Writ. People are not always understanding of this purpose or what is accomplished in the One Baptism, so they must be taught these first principles and what they incompass. This is not to annul their immersion into Christ. When an individual obeys the command of Christ in being immersed into Christ, God still accomplishes the purposes he intended. Sometimes the full import of this is not really understood till much later as they study further in the Oracles of God.

-- Anonymous, October 18, 2000

Jack,

Are you saying that a person can be ignorant of the reasons for baptism and still be saved? Or that they can be baptized for reasons that are man made but not God given reasons and still be saved?

-- Anonymous, October 18, 2000

D Lee. I was trying to clarify that when one is baptised into Christ in obedience to his command, he or she may not understand all that is involved in it, but must needs be taught more as they grow in Christ. There is much more about the "One Baptism" that I have learned since I intitially was baptised into Christ. I was trying to clarify part of the scripture quoted in Hebrews relative to "Baptisms" That in fact was the main thrust of my response. God Bless, Bro. Jack

-- Anonymous, October 19, 2000

Jack:
The point of the author of Hebrews, whether it was Paul or some unknown writer, was that debate about things theological was unimportant next to understanding the big picture. Remember, the New Testament was not created, nor even conceived, until the mid-second century, and even then was not put into its final form until the late fourth century. The writer of Hebrews, rather, was speaking of understanding the Torah, which is what the context of all the writings of the New Testament was about...to debate things like baptizm without fully understanding the Torah's most basic principles was "immature" according to the writer of Hebrews....

-- Anonymous, October 19, 2000

Alan. I have read your other posts and comments about the Torah and on some of them I can sense the essence or correlations with those of Christ under the new covenant, with many thoughts under the Torah. But I cannot see any logical or scriptural evidence to support your claim as given in your post, So I will watch for your evidence to support your last comments. Heb. 6:l makes it clear that we are to move on beyond the words of the beginning of Christ and are thereby exhorted to be steadfast in the Faith. While many discussions and thoughts have been ventured into up till this point it is now time to move on boys. What do you think Alan & Link?

-- Anonymous, October 22, 2000

Alan. I have read your other posts and comments about the Torah and on some of them I can sense the essence or correlations with those of Christ under the new covenant, with many thoughts under the Torah. But I cannot see any logical or scriptural evidence to support your claim as given in your post, So I will watch for your evidence to support your last comments.
The logic is rabbinic logic. Jesus used rabbinic logic, as did Paul. Both also used a good dose of Kabbalistic jargon; they were both trained in Jewish mysticism, obviously...
....You cannot understand anything about what Jesus and Paul taught without understanding the Torah, without understanding rabbinic hermeneutics...without understanding the context in which they taught. If you do not understand my logic, it is because you try to interpret the NT according to a religion that did not exist during the time when the NT was written; you place later interpretations upon the text, and ignore the meaning and context of the writers....
Heb. 6:l makes it clear that we are to move on beyond the words of the beginning of Christ and are thereby exhorted to be steadfast in the Faith. While many discussions and thoughts have been ventured into up till this point it is now time to move on boys. What do you think Alan & Link?
The "faith"?? Certainly not Christianity....again, the religion of Christianity did not exist during the first century...

-- Anonymous, October 23, 2000

Alan, I grant you that the term "Christianity" has fallen into ill repute. Probably cuz it is not a New Testament word. Your constant reference to the Torah as still carrying authority is interesting. I just got my first "Everyman's Talmud" the other day by a Jewish friend of mine who I am hopeful of helping him know the Messiah that came to save him. So far he has come a long way and now we are going to meet with his Rabbi, which I pray the Lord will help me to also be able to help lead to Messiah, cuz I sure can not do it alone. I do grant you much of what you have said relative to the impact that the Old Jewish faith had on him, as he created it, so he would have had alot to do with it from the beginning. Just like all creation which was made by him and for him. John Chapter I. Keep studying, Neighbor Jack

-- Anonymous, October 25, 2000

Ah...but the Messiah is here already. The "Messiah" is Israel.

-- Anonymous, October 25, 2000

As you speak of baptizm my belief if that you should be baptized as a baby especially if your parents are christians. You become a member of Gods family and it does wash away humans original sin. Although we can only do well at not sinning with Gods help. I was brought up on the King James Bible. The English wrote it and it was put in the church of England and has become the back bone of the church. Its funny to see other religions who use the king James bible but come up with their own version. It seems that people love to change things, but I believe in the teachings of Jesus Christ and the 12 apostles. You cant change what is written but people do try to come up with their own version.

-- Anonymous, December 25, 2000

If the "Messiah" is Israel ... why was Israel told to look for a coming Messiah? Israel was to look forward to ... itself?

-- Anonymous, December 26, 2000